Posted - 2008.03.26 00:50:00 -
[1]
Just when you thought the dangerous and unhealthy obsession with guns in the US couldn't get any worse this happens. A US airways pilot allowed his weapon to be negligently discharged during a flight, fortunately for the crew and passengers the safety of the flight was not compromised and no injuries where inflicted by the stray bullet.

So an apparently "certified" pilot was careless enough to allow the weapon to be discharged and it brings in to question the whole stupid idea of allowing civilian airline pilots to carry weapons, this incident could have very easily resulted in a massive tragedy and it seems pure chance that it didn't.=========================================A Man chooses, a slave obeys.

Posted - 2008.03.26 00:50:00 -
[2]
Just when you thought the dangerous and unhealthy obsession with guns in the US couldn't get any worse this happens. A US airways pilot allowed his weapon to be negligently discharged during a flight, fortunately for the crew and passengers the safety of the flight was not compromised and no injuries where inflicted by the stray bullet.

So an apparently "certified" pilot was careless enough to allow the weapon to be discharged and it brings in to question the whole stupid idea of allowing civilian airline pilots to carry weapons, this incident could have very easily resulted in a massive tragedy and it seems pure chance that it didn't.=========================================A Man chooses, a slave obeys.

Posted - 2008.03.26 01:02:00 -
[7]
Can you say "reaction out of proportion" ?He was an idiot or it was an accident."Certified pilot" doesn't mean he knows anything else too well... just means he is able to fly the damned plane.Either way, what's the big deal ?

Posted - 2008.03.26 01:02:00 -
[8]
Can you say "reaction out of proportion" ?He was an idiot or it was an accident."Certified pilot" doesn't mean he knows anything else too well... just means he is able to fly the damned plane.Either way, what's the big deal ?

Posted - 2008.03.26 01:09:00 -
[11]
While I didn't really consider this to be a big thing I think the OP is just trying to say that it couldn't have happened had he not had a gun. Who knows, things happen sometimes, things don't happen sometimes. Good things bad things, who's in control of what? nobody knows.

Originally by:KirjavaThis man speaks the truth, when he farts we count the length in seconds and make squillions buying winning lottery tickets.

Originally by:Akita TCan you say "reaction out of proportion" ?He was an idiot or it was an accident."Certified pilot" doesn't mean he knows anything else too well... just means he is able to fly the damned plane.Either way, what's the big deal ?

He was "certified" to carry the weapon, and its a big deal exactly because he was either a idiot in charge of a huge mass of fast moving metal at 30,000 feet that allowed a gun to fire in the *****pit or he was negligent enough to allow the accident to happen placing lives at risk.

124 passengers and possibly a large number of people on the ground where placed at risk because of the policy of allowing airline pilots to carry weapons, the stray bullet could also of hit and killed or injured a crew member.

Originally by:Ryan Scouse'UKEdited by: Ryan Scouse''UK on 26/03/2008 01:05:15such a bad troll the title makes it sound so much worse then it is -

wow so his gun went off - didnt harm the plane or anyone.. yawn who cares?

I nearly slipped in the rain today - almost.. but I was ok - next.

It was more luck than skill or judgment that nothing happened this time.

Originally by:SoftRevolutionI presume they're not going to be carrying anything that will hole the fuselage

I presume a standard 9mm pistol would probably put a hole in the fuselage unless its a short barrel pistol like a makharov, you can shoot at a cars tyres with a makharov and the bullets richochet all over the place, fun for all the family in the emergency room !

Originally by:SoftRevolutionI presume they're not going to be carrying anything that will hole the fuselage

I presume a standard 9mm pistol would probably put a hole in the fuselage unless its a short barrel pistol like a makharov, you can shoot at a cars tyres with a makharov and the bullets richochet all over the place, fun for all the family in the emergency room !

also good sig

They may be required to use frangible bullets which disintegrate when they impact a hard surface. Whether it could punch through the airplane skin or break a window I do not know (betting it would shatter a window).

The concept of pilots with guns was a stupid kneejerk reaction post 9/11. There are Air Marshals supposedly on many flights...leave it to them.

It is hard to think of an instance where a pilot having a gun would change things in a hijack situation. Just make it so the doors cannot be kicked in and all is well. Or would people rather the pilot comes storming out of the*****pit guns blazing?

Accidents happen but the pilots are responsible for hundreds of passengers lives. Had that bullet shatter the*****pit window I am willing to bet that would have killed the flight crew outright (at least I cannot imagine surviving a swirling mass of glass laden air moving at 550+ mph).--------------------------------------------------"Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"

Originally by:Imperator Jora'hThey may be required to use frangible bullets which disintegrate when they impact a hard surface. Whether it could punch through the airplane skin or break a window I do not know (betting it would shatter a window).

The concept of pilots with guns was a stupid kneejerk reaction post 9/11. There are Air Marshals supposedly on many flights...leave it to them.

It is hard to think of an instance where a pilot having a gun would change things in a hijack situation. Just make it so the doors cannot be kicked in and all is well. Or would people rather the pilot comes storming out of the*****pit guns blazing?

Accidents happen but the pilots are responsible for hundreds of passengers lives. Had that bullet shatter the*****pit window I am willing to bet that would have killed the flight crew outright (at least I cannot imagine surviving a swirling mass of glass laden air moving at 550+ mph).

Such a bullet could easily damage hydraulics, electrical systems and avionics even if its chances of penetrating a fuselage is reduced and any of those systems being damaged like that could result in a fire or loss of critical systems. The*****pit glass is the main danger as its under a huge amount of force and as you say the shattered glass could have killed the crew or even injured them to the point of being unable to control the aircraft.

About the doors isn't it mandatory that airliner have armoured doors designed to resist forced entry anyway?=========================================A Man chooses, a slave obeys.

Posted - 2008.03.26 02:17:00 -
[20]Edited by: Veng3ance on 26/03/2008 02:17:18OMG really! We should take all guns owned by pilots away and sell them to 3rd world countries in the middle east! That will solve THAT!

Posted - 2008.03.26 03:54:00 -
[21]
The worst possible outcome is that someone COULD'VE died... every system on board has a backup or 2, there is a fire control, the ****pit windshield will stop a round from a lower powered handgun, it's designed to stop just about anything. I doubt it was a .45 or a .357 magnum.

My synopsis, OP is a hippie troll that wants some attention.------------------Sig--------------------------J. Kerouac said it best in The Vanity of Duluoz:

Posted - 2008.03.26 04:26:00 -
[23]
Some of the fun bits about those commercial planes...

The *ahem* pilot's cabin (blasted profanity filters) is designed to sustain strikes from rather hefty birds at high speed. (As in full-on strikes from geese while cruising at speed) The 'glass' must not only stay in place, but must be able to see through. There are a few handguns out there that will exceed this force, but not many of the more popular models will quite manage it. Certain ammo types may be better at punching a hole through the glass, but the glass is designed to withstand tremendous impact/damage and not fall apart.

The flight controls of these jets aren't exactly made out of spun-sugar either. Granted that there are a few key points where severe damage could disable a plane, but it would take much more than most handguns could provide in a single shot. (and even then, you'd have to score a direct hit, juuust right)

Frangible rounds: A lovely family of ammo-types that shatter and scatter upon impact with just about anything. Upon breaking up, the round quickly spreads out, losing effectiveness as a deadly force. These frangible rounds are also one of the nastiest things to get shot with, as they do scatter little pieces all through the body, making a fun mess for the medical folks to try to figure out. (Usually in an autopsy)

Quite simply, that little gun ain't gonna kill that plane. It'll do nasty things to a human, but it'll only make extra work for the ground crews who will have to go through and check everything to re-certify the plane.The pilot... well, his primary training is in flying a large multi-ton plane safely. Sadly, the simple weapons safety courses available today don't really qualify one as proficient with firearms.

Still, I'd much rather have people dedicated to keeping the plane and human cargo intact being better armed than those who would rather take the plane down._______________________________

Mine da rocks, make more ships.Pop da rats, make more rigs.Sell da gear, make more money.

Originally by:Helen HuntsThe pilot... well, his primary training is in flying a large multi-ton plane safely. Sadly, the simple weapons safety courses available today don't really qualify one as proficient with firearms.

A civilian should never be allowed to carry a weapon under these circumstances without intensive training both in the handling of the weapon and the usage of the weapon, would any of you like to be on a flight with an armed man who does not have sufficient training in charge of your safety? the minimum training he should have should be of the equivelant level to law enforcement hostage rescue because he is more of a danger to the passengers and the crew than to any terrorist because if he cannot even handle the weapon without accidentally firing out how can he be expected to fight off terrorists without killing or wounding the passengers?

Oh well that's ok the only consequence was somebody might have died? are you for real? so its ok to put weapons in the hands of people who obviously should not have them as the only risk is innocent people loosing their life.

Posted - 2008.03.26 05:23:00 -
[27]
There is a well trained armed person on every aircraft... he's called an Air Marshall. The gun in the*****pit is in case a hijacker is going to get into the*****pit. the*****pit is armored, the round from a small handgun is not going into the passanger compartment from the*****pit.

Thousands of people die every day, if one person is killed by an accident I can hardly consider that a crisis... maybe 6 years in the infantry has made me an indifferent ass .

And in a twist of your sig.... An armed man is a citizen, an unarmed man is a subject.

------------------Sig--------------------------J. Kerouac said it best in The Vanity of Duluoz:

Originally by:Surfin's PlunderBunnyThere is a well trained armed person on every aircraft... he's called an Air Marshall. The gun in the*****pit is in case a hijacker is going to get into the*****pit. the*****pit is armored, the round from a small handgun is not going into the passanger compartment from the*****pit.

Thousands of people die every day, if one person is killed by an accident I can hardly consider that a crisis... maybe 6 years in the infantry has made me an indifferent ass .

And in a twist of your sig.... An armed man is a citizen, an unarmed man is a subject.

The Air Marshall is well trained airline pilots are not, the pilot was a buffoon who should not have been in possession of a firearm and its obvious he was a buffoon for allowing it to be fire, a gun doesn't just go off it needs a particular set of circumstances

-it must be loaded-a round must be chambered-the safety catch needs to be off-the trigger needs a decent amount of pressure

So why was the safety catch off? As for people dieing every day yes it happens that does not mean the public should be placed under unnecessary risk.=========================================A Man chooses, a slave obeys.

Disarming pilots because of this is likewise an over reaction (considering the millions of flights since they were armed nothing like this has occurred).

Nevertheless the point more is the pilots should NOT be armed in the first place.

9/11 would not have been averted if the pilots had been armed. The hijackers stormed the place the pilot sits so fast they did not even get a chance to radio there was a hijacking. If the pilots did have guns they would only have succeeded in arming the hijackers with pistols instead of box cutters.

Of course box cutters got the job done in those cases but that was because everyone operated under the assumption that hijackers were yahoos who wanted a free trip to Cuba and some publicity and mostly everyone gets to go home after. Nowadays the assumption is if hijackers take the plane you are in a missile and may as well jump the hijackers. However, jumping box cutter toting hijackers is simpler than jumping now pistol wielding hijackers that they got from the pilots (as would have been the case on 9/11).

Additionally, do ANY of you want the pilot to leave the place they sit and run into the cabin and start a Wild West Shoot Em Up in the cabin?

Basically there is no good use for a gun on a plane unless you are the hijacker and if anything pilots with guns gives the bad guys a potential source for a gun on the plane. Far, far better is just keeping the armored door shut and let the hijackers cool their heels. If they start offing passengers I suspect the passengers will try to mob them (happened shortly after 9/11...crazy due rushed the front of the plane and numerous people just dogpiled on the guy).

Oh yeah...turns out frangibles are not used. They were initially but apparently testing found them more a liability than a "safety" measure so they are back to regular bullets it seems.--------------------------------------------------"Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"

COPYRIGHT NOTICEEVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.